If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: How to improve the league

Except those are designed around actual basketball skills, a very important difference.

I can get a 14 month toddler to say "timeout" and use their hands to signal it. Being able to merely call a timeout isn't a skill.

You can even get Chris Webber to call an extra one. Or two.

Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
And life itself, rushing over me
Life itself, the wind in black elms,
Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

Re: How to improve the league

I agree, but I did not understand the part you bolded. What did you mean?

Kstat took the argument into a pissing match about which players from each sport are worse. Trying to dig up the worst actions between the two sports, like the Leonard Little situation that happened 12 years ago.

The argument shouldn't be that, but rather which league has the better ability to hand down punishments and has the ability to teams to get out of contracts when something with the players go wrong.

Re: How to improve the league

The NBA would be greatly improved if the pacers trade Murph for Collison and Posey

P.O.T.Y.

Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
And life itself, rushing over me
Life itself, the wind in black elms,
Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

Re: How to improve the league

If you keep guaranteed salaries, they're the same that forced a soft cap: teams would be frequently unable to retain their own free-agents. That advantage teams have to retain their free-agents is very important, it's good for everybody and good for business. It'd make management competence less important, things would be more random and outside factors (like the attractiveness of the cities for the players) would play a much bigger role. Franchises like the Spurs, that were able to stay contenders for more than a decade operating over the cap, wouldn't exist.

No guaranteed salaries would be the only way of solving that, but to me that's an even worse solution as it'd put the long-term viability of the league in jeopardy. I dont' see how can mandatory non-guaranteed contracts work in a sport like basketball where there's such a shortage of high-level talent and that kind of talent has such an impact, it's the one that matters. Contracts length needs to be limited to protect teams from themselves, but if those limits are too harsh it exposes them, and the league, to the outside threats. You need some sort of balance. I really can't see the owners pushing for that system any time soon, they know it'd put their business in peril.

Because I seriously doubt the drawbacks are worse than what the NBA is suffering through right now. I think the league needs to get rid of guaranteed deals and move to a hard cap to keep players salaries in check while giving teams flexibility to actually compete with each other. There is no way the Pacers can compete with the Lakers in a league where you can simply throw money at your problems to over come them. At least without being perfect in every decision they make. The NBA is slowly morphing into MLB, and who wants that? The competitive balance is dead in both leagues.

My thing is that I want to see a system where a once great franchise like the Pacers isn't almost run out of business because of a few players. The NBA system is horrific, and it is blatantly obvious.

The Pacers were one of the few franchises able to turn a contending team into another contending team via retooling, a path that generally has a high failure rate and were a competitive team for years and years. How many times did Miller miss the playoffs in his career? One or twice? That kind of quality management should be rewarded (an incentive to better management makes the league overall better), not eradicated.

The impact of the financial advantages some teams have can be solved via a more robust revenue sharing system + a different luxury tax system.

The Following User Says Thank You to BlueNGold For This Useful Post:

Re: How to improve the league

The reason the NFL is better than the NBA is because almost 3/4 of the NFL franchises have a legit shot at making the playoffs, and once that happens, in one game series, anything can happen. In the NBA, only 1/4 of the teams have a legit shot at winning a title, and it might not even be that high.

Re: How to improve the league

The reason the NFL is better than the NBA is because almost 3/4 of the NFL franchises have a legit shot at making the playoffs, and once that happens, in one game series, anything can happen. In the NBA, only 1/4 of the teams have a legit shot at winning a title, and it might not even be that high.

That's one of many reasons, actually. NFL football is preferred by the general public by quite some distance for several other reasons. One is that you know the teams have studied tape and prepared extensively...AND are giving 100% effort to win that week...regardless of record the vast majority of the time.

Another is that everyone knows when the game will be held...and it's on Sunday when more people can see it both on TV and live.

More than anything though is the preceived effort level. Most people simply don't want to waste their time viewing a sports competition when the players are mailing it in.